changing server 7 scoring discussion

[imus]

EDIT: split from thread "changing server 7" because it got a bit out of hand. Use this thread to discuss the scoring on the new s7 (I might need to modify some of the messages later to make it fit this thread better).

Alex, I thought this thread was started to first get a general idea of the goals etc.. for the new server, not the specific settings (since those need to be tweaked anyway).
And true Beul overreacted in his response but from my point of view he does make a good point. We first need to get the general idea without worrying about the specific settings.
for example: "town size should be small" means, try setting it to 3, look at the size of the towns, if more than 2 towns are over 2k inhabitants (not sure if it's same for desert and temperate) it's too high and should be lowered.

I also pointed out that just removing the perf. from the goal but still using the current formula is a really bad idea.

second really important question that solves most of MY problems is:

is it possible to use BANK BALANCE/ MONTHLY INCOME / SOMETHING ELSE as the goal?
Edit: the answer was no

(answer this question in next post or at least point out to whom we should ask this).
The answer to that question could change many of my settings ...

[Andreas]

The reason I expressed concern about the scoring is not the possibility to cheat it, but the opposite actually. I was affraid that the newer players (big part of the aim of this server) will get quite low points if they have low perf. This could easily lead to 1 player winning the server, but somebody else scoring much higher. The reasons for this would be hard to figure out for the new player, because perf is not part of the goal, but is a part of the score. Maybe it won't be that bad, but we simply don't know yet.

[alex879ro]

If that happens, we will add performance. But from what I recall, the first CB server was CB&CV. I remember back then that the motivation for the CV was for scoring.
This I don`t know....performance was introduced for a lot of time. Indeed, we will watch the server and the scoring.

[imus]

Since we can't introduce other variables for scoring (so sad ) there is another option.

Set the goal to CV only so that there are no hard restrictions for performance. This way you can just race for the CV if you want and get a "high score" based on the time completed.

Point out with a comment or in the goal explanation that the performance is a SECONDARY goal. Something like this:

• PRIMARY objective: reach 30M company value
• SECONDARY objective: obtain as high performance as possible to further increase your score

This way newer players can just focus on getting that primary objective while knowing that there is a way to get higher points once you understand the game better.

As always the main issue is HOW we communicate things to our players. It took me a while to understand how someone had beaten my high score on s7 with exactly the same game length as me even tho we reached the same goal. Using my given "goal" explanation would solve this confusion.

But from what I recall, the first CB server was CB&CV. I remember back then that the motivation for the CV was for scoring.

The actual score was calculated purely on CV (and maybe perf.) because we couldn't use population at that time. We added the CV to the goal to make this slightly less awkward.
It was still a big problem and a very good reason to change the formula to what it is currently. Same as why I was requestion for a different parameter here. Sure it will somehow "work" to just disregard perf from the goal but it will cause confusion which means more work for admins just to explain what is really happening. (And as you pointed out earlier, most admins don't have that time).

[alex879ro]

I don`t quite understand your idea Imus. Maybe you can explain the following:

Point out with a comment or in the goal explanation that the performance is a SECONDARY goal. Something like this:

    PRIMARY objective: reach 30M company value
    SECONDARY objective: obtain as high performance as possible to further increase your score

We can either have a CV&Performance Goal- in this case performance is demanded in order to win the game
                                   CV Goal                      - in this case performance is not demanded and not recorded

How can we have both of them at once? Even if I set the performance for a small level as Beul suggested, if you obtain more then demanded, it is still not counted at all.

As always the main issue is HOW we communicate things to our players. It took me a while to understand how someone had beaten my high score on s7 with exactly the same game length as me even tho we reached the same goal. Using my given "goal" explanation would solve this confusion.

I agree and also want to add another thing. One of the problem that stood in the way was the fact that the scoring was kept secret for both players and admins. Only the members who participated in the developing knew what the parameters were. So admins would just read what the players were reading. So no possible way of helping them.

About the last part of your comment...I have no idea. From what I know, performance was introduced as a measure to stop the goal cheating. I never heard of performance being counted for points. Indeed, performance means variables....no of trains...no of stations and so on and those variables can influence your scoring and this is the way differences appear. But the goal plugin doesn`t take into account performance itself as counted and displayed when you type !cv .

Basically, if I remove performance from the goal, it would still be counted throught the variables in the CV, but it would not be demanded in order to finish the game.
Aaaah.....I`m starting to get what you want to say in the first lines.
Hmm...well sure....we could post such an announcement....but the differences in case of a small server would be minor (one player gets 40 points, the other gets 45 points....(an example)) and wouldn`t players just give it up fighting for performance in the end ? Most of all because it`s not required.

I hope I understood what you wanted to say...if not..please correct me

[imus]

Basically, if I remove performance from the goal, it would still be counted through the variables in the CV, but it would not be demanded in order to finish the game.

Exactly this.

That's why I would like the goal to be just CV but have at least a mention that "performance" (although maybe indirectly through some of it's variables instead of the full number) has an effect as well.

Not 100% sure what happens if you don't add perf into the goal. Maybe set perf. to 0 in the goal? Anyway the calculation does take excess perf. into account to solve CV cheating, it's best to keep that as is since we can't use other variables.

So what I think is best:
Set goal to: 30M CV and 0 perf.
Show message similar to what I pointed out earlier.

So starters will focus solely on the CV and ask about perf. if they want to know more which sets them up nicely for our other servers

ps: I'm not sure how big the difference with perf. is for the server if set to 0, would like to run some tests if you implemented it some time later ^.^
for my record of 24 on s7 (which is kinda fast) someone did reach 25 in the same time by just having a bit more performance (like 50-100 more).

[Andreas]

One of the problem that stood in the way was the fact that the scoring was kept secret for both players and admins. Only the members who participated in the developing knew what the parameters were. So admins would just read what the players were reading. So no possible way of helping them.

If I may go a little bit offtopic here: EDTI: it's on topic now - Imus

I don't think that the current situation as to knowledge of  how the score is calculated is a 'problem'. Part of the fun is to experiment, and see what gets rewarded. I think it would be enough to have something like: "For CB score is calculated through a combination of perf and game length. Extra pop (higher than goal)  is not counted." or something similar. This way, you know what is important, without having to know the exact weight of the different factors. I also think that it is good that most admins do not know more about how the score is calculated because that way they can still compete in regular games without having an advantage.

The reason aditional perf was counted and aditional cv was not was the following: Suppose extra cv is counted: I keep my perf. just below the goal on purpose and keep letting the cv grow as high as possible before the game restarts. Then I score that last pref points and I end up with an insane high score!
Why is counting extra perf not as harmfull? because performance can't go higher than 1000 anyway (and going past 900 is not easy).  Also keeping cv under goal would be pointless because it would make the game last longer, with the same cv, which would result in lower points in the end.

[imus]

From the player perspective I fully agree with you (even if you count us admins as players as well). So the scoring explanation on the website is sufficient (but minimal) info for the player. They know the kind of things that matter but still have to figure out the correct balance to achieve it. (I missed that info at the start )

From the developer perspective I disagree with hiding info from admins (this is different than hiding it from players). If there is a mistake in the formula it'll only be found by a player that gets an unfair advantage (and thus too late). In my opinion it could be better that we know what's going on (maybe hide the constants in the formula since they need to be tweaked anyway) and see if the 1 or 2 guys who implement the formula didn't miss anything (like what happened with the CB now).

This also includes that we could think together about what external parameters (some numbers alex for example could change) need to be included to easily balance the scores for each server.
For example:
current s7 needs a slightly higher score to be fair. We need to increase that external parameter by 20% to achieve that. The exact formula might stay the same and still hidden from everyone else if you want.
Or:
we changed a setting for the new s7 that decreases the lenght by 10 minutes, made it slightly easier and a lot more fitting overall, just reduce that 1 or 2 parameters a little and we're done with updating the score. No need for the_dude/chucky/score implementor himself to modify it right there and then.

I'll try not to annoy you guys with my opinion about hiding the score after this post except if specifically asked about it. There are advantages and disadvantages to it, it's up to you guys to decide which are more important.

[alex879ro]

Personally, I agree and disagree with making the scoring public or not.

We got 1 succesfull case on either side, but both of them can be interpreted because they don`t follow the same standard

CV scoring - a lot of variables - private scoring (we don`t know all the parameters for it) - direct parameters (which can be cheated)
CB scoring - 1 variable * - public for admins and players (except the physical formula) - indirect parameter (which can`t be cheated)

* - i`m talking about the original version. Right now we maybe testing with more parameters...that`s what I remember. But it is way too late here to check now. But a good example, since the original scoring is still operational as we speak.

About CV goal Imus....that`s what I`m thinking. I delayed it a week so we could have more time to understand our oppinions. But it is nevertheless what I was thinking:

30-40 mil goal for S7 (now 40 mil seems a bit too much when thinking about it:)  ) and reducing S3 from 150 mil to 100 mil (players complained that they want a smaller goal, but there are also some new players on it, so I want to push it to the middle of both sides)

About the current scoring parameter....we can only find that out after monitoring the server after the change. I hope we can reset the highscores of the server (after saving them ofc) and we can start with a fresh list

@Beul I understand your pov, altough I wish to make 1 thing straight. From what I know (I maybe wrong) , performance is not "counted" but considered. Performance can also drop your score , if a certain level is not met. I remember seeing the formula once, but didn`t check. That`s what I remember from my games.

For example 2 games, each with a CV that earns you 400 points, but with different performance levels, one can have 470 points, the other one 340 points.
That`s what I remember. It may also be the reason why it is not considered dangerous. Also, the time parameter is considered.

When you talk about CV, scoring more cv would only get you points.
When talking about CV and performance , scoring more performance can also drop you the points , or earn you less points if the time parameter is higher.

All I said are memories, so don`t take them as granted. I tried to maybe help with a clue in how the performance is considered.

If it comes to personal oppinions, I think our CB scoring that Der_Herr developed is way more clean and efficient compared to the CV scoring. It also depends on one parameter which is very hard to cheat : time . I remember we tried to do that for the CV scoring when it was developed, but we were concerned in getting a more realistic result (2 games with the same amount of time and the same number of trains , but different scoring for them)

Now, after testing the CB scoring, we obtained that with 1 parameter only.

[imus]

current CB scoring technically takes 3 parameters into account (that I know of): time taken, population reached, population started.

I'm guessing the perf. can cause a lower score if you didn't reach the goal for perf. So if you only got 50% of the perf, it may show that you only reached like 80% of the total goal. Would it work fine if we set perf. goal to 0? (which also fits in the secondary goal in my idea ^.^)

Reason why the CB scoring wont work for CV is that better trains gives a huge boost to CV gain, while town growth is constant no matter what year the game is in. So it's easy to improve the record on a server by starting at the latest possible time (maybe use an "idle" company to keep the server from resetting) and then win in record time. No way to prevent it since it's technically fair play. (note this is a problem that will be present with any type of variables besides city population exept maybe purely perf.)

ps: scoring reset is a different discussion, I might start a new thread about it just to discuss some different ideas about that =D


Current goal would be:
30M CV with 0 perf

idea is to first test if the score behaves normally with 0 perf, otherwise 100 perf could be a decent alternative.
Feel free to give your opinion about this goal, or if you can already tell why it won't work (preferably with a solution =D)

[alex879ro]

I repeat: CB server takes into account only 1 value : time.  I dunno if Der_Herr added another value, but I`m talking about the first version of the CB scoring.

Population (starting or reached ) wasn`t taken into account.

The idea of cheating the CV can be solved by increasing the goal. If you see that they cheat 5% of the goal, you increase the goal with 5% and problem is solved. You get the same amount of points for a slightly bigger goal. Unfortunately, it also affects the other players. It is still a work in progress...

My oppinion is that the CB scoring would work fine in CV too with the same variable : time

Current goal would be : 25 MIL and 0 perf

Personally I don`t see the difference if you add 100 performance (which is achievable by everybody) or do not add it all. The players still reach 100 performance so it is the same thing.